Standardization of the surgical technique and reporting for radical right colectomy with central vascular ligation and complete mesocolic excision (RRoC-STAR) : Delphi consensus

Complete mesocolic excision refers to a radical right hemicolectomy for cancer following embryologically defined anatomical planes. However, heterogeneity in definitions and techniques is a barrier to research. The aim of the Radical Right Colectomy-Surgical Technique Approved Report (RRoC-STAR) collaborative is to provide international expert consensus-based definitions and standardized terminology and surgical steps for right hemicolectomy for locally advanced colon cancer. Authors of publications reporting on radical right hemicolectomy techniques were invited to complete an ACCORD-compliant Delphi questionnaire (two rounds). A standardized name (for the procedure) and a data sheet for reporting the procedure were proposed, along with 21 items, including terminology and surgical steps. The assembled panel was asked to vote for each item, with consensus considered to have been reached for items that achieved at least 80% agreement. Of 162 invited authors, 67 completed both Delphi rounds. All but 1 of the 21 items received consensus after 2 rounds. Consensus was reached on the use of the proposed data sheet for reporting, the term radical right colectomy (RRC), and the surgical steps deemed necessary for RRC, namely preservation of mesocolic integrity, sharp dissection of the anterolateral surface of the superior mesenteric vein up to the middle colic vein, ligation at the origin of vessels, and dissection of lymphoadipose tissue around the gastrocolic trunk of Henle. This study provides an international expert consensus-based definition and standardization of terminology and the surgical steps required to perform RRC. A comprehensive data sheet for reporting RRC is introduced to enable data homogenization from current and future studies. This study provides an international expert consensus-based definition and standardization of terminology and the surgical steps required to perform radical right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision, central vascular ligation, and D3 lymphadenectomy. A comprehensive data sheet for reporting radical right colectomy is introduced to enable data homogenization from current and future studies

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out. Methods Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR). Results Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049). Conclusions This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol

High adherence to enhanced recovery pathway independently reduces major morbidity and mortality rates after colorectal surgery: a reappraisal of the iCral2 and iCral3 multicenter prospective studies

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) offers lower overall morbidity rates and shorter hospital stay after colorectal surgery (CRS); high adherence rates to ERAS may significantly reduce major morbidity (MM), anastomotic leakage (AL), and mortality (M) rates as well. Methods: Prospective enrollment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in two separate 18- and 12-month periods among 78 surgical centers in Italy from 2019 to 2021. Adherence to ERAS pathway items was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints (MM, AL, and M rates) were identified through logistic regression analyses, presenting odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals. Results: An institutional ERAS status was declared by 48 out of 78 (61.5%) participating centers. The median overall adherence to ERAS was 75%. Among 8,359 patients included in both studies, MM, AL, and M rates were 6.3%, 4.4%, and 1.0%, respectively. Several patient-related and treatment-related variables showed independently higher rates for primary endpoints: male gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class III, neoadjuvant treatment, perioperative steroids, intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions, length of the operation >180’, surgery for malignancy. On the other hand, ERAS adherence >85% independently reduced MM (OR, 0.91) and M (OR, 0.25) rates, whereas no mechanical bowel preparation independently reduced AL (OR, 0.68) rates. Conclusions: Among other patient- or treatment-related variables, ERAS adherence >85% independently reduced MM and M rates, whereas no mechanical bowel preparation independently reduced AL rates after CRS

Length of stay after colorectal surgery in Italy: the gap between “fit for” and “actual” discharge in a prospective cohort of 4529 cases

Background It is common to observe a gap between the day on which the discharge criteria are reached and the actual day of discharge after colorectal surgery. The aim of this study is to understand the reasons for this difference and its clinical impact on the overall length of stay (LOS). Methods All patients enrolled in the prospective iCral3 study were analyzed regarding any difference and reason between the "fit for discharge" (FFD) and "actual discharge" (AD) dates. The association between the gap and the LOS in the whole population was then assessed through a multivariate regression model including other confounding variables. Results The analysis included 4529 patients, with a median [IQR] LOS of 6 [4-8] days. The median [IQR] LOS was 6 [4-8] days in the no-gap group (3,910 patients, 86.3%), significantly lower (p < .001) than 7 [6-10] days in the gap group (619 patients, 13.7%). Among the gap reasons, the "need for postoperative rehabilitation" compared to "not willing to return home" and "social constraints" was associated with the longest LOS (9 [6.0-12.5] days, p < 0.001 vs other reasons). The existence of the gap independently determined a 2.3-day lengthening of LOS. Conclusions Among other factors, the gap between FFD and AD had an independent impact on LOS. The most frequent reasons for this gap were "not willing to return home" and "social constraint", while the "need for postoperative rehabilitation" had the greater clinical impact

Textbook Outcome in Colorectal Surgery for Cancer: An Italian Version

background/objectives: the textbook outcome (TO) is a composite tool introduced to uniform surgical units and regulate surgical quality and outcomes. a patient is considered TO only if all predetermined items are met. In colorectal surgery, TO represents a new tool that can achieve important results given the prevalence of colorectal cancers. however, at present, there is a lack of uniformity in the TO’s definition. this study utilized the delphi process to define an Italian version of the TO in colorectal cancer. methods: the survey consisted of two rounds of online questionnaires submitted to an expert panel in colorectal oncological surgery, renowned academic surgeons, who had attended multiple scientific conferences and who were authors of papers on this specific topic. five main topics with 26 questions were investigated through an online modified delphi method. Items with almost 75% agreement achieved consensus. results: twenty-eight Italian experts were selected and participated in the two rounds. the italian version of the textbook outcome in colorectal surgery was defined as the presence of 90-day postoperative survival, negative margins and at least 12 lymph nodes, a minimally invasive approach, ostomy fashioning if preoperatively planned, postoperative complication < clavien–dindo 3b, at least 10 ERAS items, no readmission, proper CHT and RT regimens, complete colonoscopy after or before surgery and tumor board evaluation. conclusions: the textbook outcome in colorectal cancer patients is a quality instrument providing a complete overview of the care of such patients, from diagnosis to treatment. we hereby propose an italian version of the TO with outcomes chosen by an expert panel

Colorectal surgery in Italy during the Covid19 outbreak: a survey from the iCral study group

Background The COVID19 pandemic had a deep impact on healthcare facilities in Italy, with profound reorganization of surgical activities. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group collecting 43 Italian surgical centers experienced in colorectal surgery from multiple regions performed a quick survey to make a snapshot of the current situation. Methods A 25-items questionnaire was sent to the 43 principal investigators of the iCral study group, with questions regard- ing qualitative and quantitative aspects of the surgical activity before and after the COVID19 outbreak. Results Two-thirds of the centers were involved in the treatment of COVID19 cases. Intensive care units (ICU) beds were partially or totally reallocated for the treatment of COVID19 cases in 72% of the hospitals. Elective colorectal surgery for malignancy was stopped or delayed in nearly 30% of the centers, with less than 20% of them still scheduling elective colo- rectal resections for frail and comorbid patients needing postoperative ICU care. A significant reduction of the number of colorectal resections during the time span from January to March 2020 was recorded, with significant delay in treatment in more than 50% of the centers. Discussion Our survey confirms that COVID19 outbreak is severely affecting the activity of colorectal surgery centers partici- pating to iCral study group. This could impact the activity of surgical centers for many months after the end of the emergency

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group

Background: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. Methods: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. Results: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. Conclusion: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence. Keywords: Colon cancer; Fluorescence guided surgery; ICG; Laparoscopy; Rectal cancer

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN)

Background: Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. Methods: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. Results: A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray’s tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray’s tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI − 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference − 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI − 5.0% to ∞). Conclusions: Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resectio

Length of stay after colorectal surgery in Italy: the gap between “fit for” and “actual” discharge in a prospective cohort of 4529 cases

Background: It is common to observe a gap between the day on which the discharge criteria are reached and the actual day of discharge after colorectal surgery. The aim of this study is to understand the reasons for this difference and its clinical impact on the overall length of stay (LOS). Methods: All patients enrolled in the prospective iCral3 study were analyzed regarding any difference and reason between the "fit for discharge" (FFD) and "actual discharge" (AD) dates. The association between the gap and the LOS in the whole population was then assessed through a multivariate regression model including other confounding variables. Results: The analysis included 4529 patients, with a median [IQR] LOS of 6 [4-8] days. The median [IQR] LOS was 6 [4-8] days in the no-gap group (3,910 patients, 86.3%), significantly lower (p < .001) than 7 [6-10] days in the gap group (619 patients, 13.7%). Among the gap reasons, the "need for postoperative rehabilitation" compared to "not willing to return home" and "social constraints" was associated with the longest LOS (9 [6.0-12.5] days, p < 0.001 vs other reasons). The existence of the gap independently determined a 2.3-day lengthening of LOS. Conclusions: Among other factors, the gap between FFD and AD had an independent impact on LOS. The most frequent reasons for this gap were "not willing to return home" and "social constraint", while the "need for postoperative rehabilitation" had the greater clinical impact